Citizen’s Participation as Co-Producer in Licensing

adequately and easily understood. Received:27-10-2021 Revised:30-10-2021 Accepted:07-11-2021 Abstract. To improve the image of the bureaucracy, which is still complicated and difficult, causing the public's reluctance to take care of their own permits, the one-stop integrated service and investment office (DPMPTSP) Province of DKI Jakarta initiated the implementation of the PTSP Keliling Kampung as part of the PTSP Ruang Publik Program. The activity was carried out using the Co-Production concept which includes the role of citizens’ participation in it. The purpose of this study is to see the extent of citizen’s participation as co-producer in licensing service activities through co-production forming factors and involvement in each phase of the service cycle. This research was conducted through a postpositivist approach with qualitative data collection methods. The results of the study show that in these activities community participation as co-producers has been seen with the active involvement of the community in the form of providing resources in service activities and licensing assistance, the motivation of the community as a voluntary public service provider, and the creation of private and/or public value in the form of outputs or outcomes. Seeing community involvement in the service cycle phase, including in the commissioning, designing, delivery, and assessment phases, in these activities community participation as co-producers has reached the assessment phase. This activity has achieved social benefits and the active role of the co-producer starting from the planning stage to the evaluation and assessment stage in the licensing service activity.


INTRODUCTION
Referring to UU No. 25/2009 concerning Public Services, Pasal 18 states that the public has the right to obtain quality services by the principles and objectives of service. In the aspect of life, society always demands good and quality service from bureaucrats, although these expectations are sometimes not achieved because public services that have occurred so far in Indonesia are still difficult, expensive, and slow. Services that should be aimed at the community are often turned back into public services provided to the state. Whereas in general the purpose of public services is to provide satisfaction to the community as service users where this satisfaction can be obtained by providing excellent service, which is reflected in transparency, namely services that are open, easy and accessible to all parties who need and are provided adequately and easily understood. with a list of TPU names in the form of orange boxes and several pieces of information that she did not understand (Megapolitan.Kompas.com, 2018). This is an example of the ignorance of the public who are demanded instantly to be able to immediately experience changes to the licensing service system from the original manual service by bringing several files to the PTSP office, but now everything is done online. Not all people can know the technical things needed in applying for these permits, so for some people, the online process becomes a difficulty.
The stigma of "difficulty" for some people who are not yet technologically literate in processing online permits will also result in them not wanting to take care of their permits, even though these permits are quite important for them, especially for those who run businesses.
Based on data from the Department of Industry, Trade, Cooperatives and Small and Medium Enterprises (PPKUKM) in 2019, as many as 84,388 Micro Small Business Actors (PUMK) did not yet have a Micro Small Business Permit (IUMK) (metro.tempo.co, 2020). Even though some benefits will be obtained by business actors by having a license, namely the business has legality or a valid legal umbrella, so that it will be easier when applying for banking financing in the context of business development and increasing business credibility in the eyes of customers.
Facing the challenges of online licensing transformation as well as several other challenges in accessing licensing services such as high levels of activity and mobility so that they do not have a special time to come to the government office for licensing/non-licensing themselves, access to information and licensing services available are still limited following operating hours government, and the image of the bureaucracy which is still convoluted and difficult, causing the public's reluctance to take care of their permits, one-stop integrated service and investment office (DPMPTSP) Province of DKI Jakarta at that time initiated to present the implementation of PTSP Ruang Publik program that using the concept of Co-Production by including the role of citizens participation in it. The Co-Production concept implemented in licensing services is appropriate where Co-Production focuses on joint efforts between the government and the community to produce better public service outcomes.
The concept of co-production itself in the development of public administration is in the New Public Service (NPS) mode which believes that collaboration between professionals, citizens, and organizations is indispensable to meet the complex needs of society (Voorberg, 2017). Various definitions of the concept of co-production have been stated by many experts since the first definition issued by Elinor Ostrom in 1972 in Voorberg (2017), namely, 'coproduction as the processes through which inputs, used to provide a good or service, are contributed by individuals who are not in the same organization". In administrative theory, Bovaird & Loffler (2016) define co-production as the relationship between service users and public organizations, depending on their respective roles in the planning and delivery of public services. While Sicilia, et al. (2016) define co-production with all kinds of involvement of citizens and nongovernment actors in various stages of policymaking and public service delivery. Co-production refers to any form or process of citizens (as individuals, groups, or communities) and public service providers (i.e., public organizations, non-profit professionals, or private organizations) collaborating in the planning and delivering of public services. Many studies conducted have shown positive results with the use of the concept of co-production in public service. The research by Cepiku & Giordano (2014), which analyzes the concept of co-production in the health sector, namely the community health worker (CHW) program in Ethiopia. In the CHW program, co-production is considered capable of providing basic health services to other communities and is more in line with the health needs of the local community compared to clinic-based services, for being cheaper and for fostering local self-reliance and participation. The co-production project succeeded in revitalizing and strengthening the community's role in malaria control.
Various previous studies discussing licensing services in Jakarta have also been carried out. Some conducted research on service performance analysis carried out by service provider agencies, evaluation of the service programs provided, as well as the implementation of egovernment in licensing services. Looking at the research, it is known that several aspects of licensing services in DKI Jakarta Province such as one-day service have not fully met the expectations of licensing/non-licensing applicants, so they still need improvements to realize services that meet the applicant's expectations to create service satisfaction to the community (see Setyawan, 2017). Another analysis on the implementation of e-government in licensing services, it is also known that it cannot be said to be running effectively and efficiently in terms of service delivery, for example in online funeral licensing services (see Novita, 2019) and complaint management through the Integrated Licensing Complaints Information System (SI-PINTER) (see Primadian, 2019). This illustrates that the research that has been carried out in licensing services has mostly focused on analyzing the performance of service providers and analyzing the evaluation of the programs held. Meanwhile, research related to Co-Production has also been done quite a lot. There are several different issues raised which form the basis of the research. Some focus on how to implement Co-Production in a public service (see Cepiku & Giordano, 2014;Gemael, C. & Janann, J.M., 2017), the relationship between Co-Production and the development of communication and information technology (see Moon, 2018). In addition, there are also those that focus on the analysis of several variables on their effects on Co-Production (see Bovaird, T., etc, 2015).
This research itself focuses on developing the concept of Co-Production in the field of licensing services in a one-stop integrated service system, using Alford's theory (2009), which states that in Co-Production there is at least active participation/involvement of the community in the provision of services, the motivation of the community as a public service provider are fully/partially voluntary, as well as private and/or public value creation in the form of outputs or outcomes. Empirical studies on Co-Production that accept this definition are specifically focused on studying examples of community involvement in public service delivery (Brandsen & Honingh, 2015). Thus, this research focuses on licensing public services where for this focus there are not many studies that discuss it with the development of the Co-Production concept. Research on the concept of Co-Production in a case study of this public service will be able to see the potential and challenges, as well as the resulting benefits. This research on the implementation of Co-Production in the field of licensing services, which is different from previous studies, will enrich the resulting analysis and explain the limits of Co-Production to what extent it can be implemented in a public service, so that it will become the novelty of this research as a form of contribution. science development.
The PTSP Public Space Program itself has one of its activities, namely PTSP Keliling Kampung which includes the role of community participation as co-producer. Thus, the general objective of this research is to find out whether the licensing service can include the concept of co-production with active collaboration between the government and the community as service recipients, and the specific objective is to see the extent of community participation in PTSP Keliling Kampung activities. The PTSP Keliling Kampung was carried out by analyzing the forming factors of co-production using Alford's (2009) and the typology of Co-Production, especially in which service cycles, community participation is in the application of co-production using the theory of Nabatchi, et.al (2017), as a research analysis knife.

METHODS
This study uses a post-positivist approach with qualitative methods. Through this approach, it can be seen how citizens' participation as co-producer in the co-production process is applied to licensing services. Creswell (2010) states that this approach does not make theory an absolute knowledge for studying human behavior and actions, but this approach reflects the need to identify and assess the causes that can affect the results. Research with a post-positivist approach begins with a theory, then continues by collecting relevant supporting data. This type of research is a descriptive study where the author tries to describe and explain the role of citizens participation in the co-production process in licensing services in the one-stop integrated service system Province of DKI Jakarta.
The author uses qualitative data collection techniques including in-depth interviews with several key informants from the PTSP both at the provincial level and PTSP at the regional level which directly organizes these activities. The data analysis technique used is an ideal type of qualitative data analysis. Mentioned by Neuman (2014) for ideal type is a qualitative data analysis strategy that compares reality in the field with theory as ideal conditions. In this study, comparisons of primary data obtained from key informant interviews were carried out, then triangulation was carried out between theories, informants (both key informants and between informants), and relevant documents such as Agency Performance Reports, DPMPTSP Annual Reports, DPMPTSP Strategic Plans, regulations governing implementation of the program of activities, as well as news from credible source.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The implementation of the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities using the co-production concept is evidence of the bureaucratic and administrative reforms carried out by the DKI Jakarta Provincial DPMPTSP by providing licensing services at community activity centers directly. This has an important role in bringing permits closer to the community by facilitating public accessibility in obtaining permits and non-licensing. The pattern of cooperation that was built in the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities through co-production together with the service user community directly in the process of providing licensing services is a new effort taken to improve service quality, especially in the context of assisting the online licensing system transformation.
With the issuance of the Instruction of the Head of the Investment Office and One-Stop Integrated Service Province of DKI Jakarta Number 54/2018 concerning the Implementation of PTSP in Ruang Publik, it has illustrated that the concept of co-production is also a collaboration concept that can be chosen between the local government as the permit giver and the citizens as the recipient of licensing services to further improve the quality of the service itself. The role of citizens participation in these activities is very strong. The analysis of citizens participation as a co-producer in the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities was carried out by looking at whether this activity is true that it is a co-production and if it is a co-production, then what is the co-production model like and at what level is the community involved in the program of activities. To answer this question, in this study, the forming factors and typologies that emerged from these activities were analyzed.

Forming Factors of Co-Production in Public Service
To analyze whether the program of activities is a true concept of co-production, the researcher chooses to look at it from the forming factors of co-production itself. In this analysis, the researcher uses the theory from Alford (2009) which states that to identify co-production, at least 3 (three) elements must be seen as forming factors of co-production, including 1) Active participation/involvement of the community in the provision of services; 2) Community motivation as public service providers are voluntary; 3) Participation creates private value and/or public value in the form of output or outcome.

1) Active participation/involvement of the community in the provision of services
As a concept of participation in public services, the first component that must be seen in the concept of co-production is the role of participation or involvement of the community in the public service. The role of participation emphasized by Alford (2009) is more active participation.
The intended active participation or involvement is where the community or parties outside the internal government directly take part in a public service process that also results in the success of the service. Such participation or involvement lies not only in providing material resources owned by the community to the government for the implementation of public services but also in their direct role as co-producers who jointly carry out public services.
In activities, PTSP Keliling Kampung, The parties directly involved in the organization of the activity are representatives from the RW/RT, and other elements of the community, while the sub-district government only knows about these activities and as an opening the way for initial communication between PTSP and citizens, where the administrative affairs are more owned by the kelurahan and Kecamatan. In the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities, the participation component of the community/service recipients has been seen where there is a cooperation between the community, namely RT and RW representatives with PTSP at several points of work. First, the parties involved in production activities or organizing activities are PTSP as a licensing service and the community as hosts who provide locations and some infrastructure such as benches and tables. Thus, for the first parameter, is the involvement of the community/service recipients in the implementation of activities already fulfilled, where the community as recipients of licensing services has been involved in these activities.
Furthermore, when viewed from the second parameter, is the active role of the community/service recipients in these service activities, in PTSP Keliling Kampung activities, the community has also seen an active role from the community where the community in this case the RT/RW management takes part of the role of PTSP in the licensing and non-licensing process is to disseminate licensing to residents who do not have permits, collect data on residents who do not have IMB, IUMK, and other permits, distribute requirements and help residents prepare licensing documents so that on the day of the activity, documents for submission of requirements are complete. This of course further supports the success and effectiveness of the licensing process in these activities, and this is following what was emphasized by Alford (2009), namely the contribution of real actions from the community that also support the success of the public service itself.
Thus, in general, the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities have met the first indicator as a forming factor in co-production, namely the active participation/involvement of the community in providing services as co-producers. Participation from the community is even the main key in organizing activities where the role of RT/RW representatives is very influential because if there is no role for RT/RW in it, the activities in public spaces located directly within the community will not be carried out. The implementation of service in public spaces is known to increase community participation. As revealed by Valentina, et.al (2020), that public participation can be influenced by public spaces formed in society, public spaces are created at all levels and levels of society, not least in local communities. Public space is a space used by the community to interact with each other by discussing and acting. This space is indirectly the basis for the establishment and form of the state. The existence of public space is also an important form of increasing public participation in overseeing every government policy, through rational discussion without any intervention, so that the concept of deliberative democracy can emerge. Beside that, RT/RW representatives in socializing and assisting other residents in fulfilling licensing requirements further increase the effectiveness of these services where the community manages to obtain permits according to their needs.

2) Community motivation as public service providers is voluntary
In the concept of public participation, community motivation is also an important discussion, where people tend to have their motivation to participate and want to be involved.
People want to be more actively involved when the public service is directly related to them, their families, and their environment. The motivation can be in the form of people's desire and persistence in solving problems and meeting individual needs, and these services are services that are directly related to themselves. Alford (2009) reveals the motivation that underlies the community to do co-production together with government officials in service is based on their initiative or voluntary with the main goal in themselves is to provide benefits for their needs and lives. Voluntary motivation is more emphasized on a group of people who are willing to take more roles than others in the implementation of public services, wherein in return, they get appreciation or self-satisfaction. Wilson (1973) further stated in Alford (2009) that people can contribute even if it costs them financially because they enjoy the company and respect of others.
In the PTSP Keliling Kampung, the components of the community/service recipients are also known that the community is motivated based on their initiative and is voluntary. The RT/RW management as community representatives who act as co-producers in the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities stated that their motivation was more on a sense of responsibility as civil servants who helped provide services to the community. In addition, the wider motivation that may exist from the community as co-producers is on a voluntary and cooperation basis. Although the motivation arose not based on its initiative when there was an invitation from the PTSP to be involved in activities. Referring to the motivational assumptions presented by Alford (2009), the motivation of the RW/RT management and other community elements in these activities is more directed to the second assumption, namely that which is carried out by groups by taking part in collective action for the benefit of many other people. This is also known as the "logic of collective action" expressed by Mancur Olsin's (1965) in Alford (2009), which refers to interest groups who seek to achieve public policy goals or work for collective gains such as a cleaner environment, a healthier society. more prosperous, and so on. Thus, the first and second parameters in the indicator are met where the community involved in the program is voluntary, and they do not receive any direct payment or compensation.
The community has also realized that the effectiveness of the licensing service is an important thing because there have been many previous experiences from the community who feel that in submitting applications for permits, they often experience rejection due to errors or mistakes in fulfilling requirements, especially for technical permits such as building permit (IMB).
Where this is experienced by many people because the need for IMB permits is still high in the community for house construction or renovation. If people who build or renovate houses on a large enough scale but are not equipped with an IMB sign installed on the building site, the Satpol PP will be reprimanded by the Satpol PP directly when traveling around/patroling or through complaints from other residents. Of course, this will cause harm to the community and has the potential to cause social friction between residents and other residents. Thus, the community through the implementation of the PTSP Keliling Kampung Warga / Ospo Lingga activity also has the motivation to maximize the effectiveness of the licensing service itself so that people who need permits can have permits.
Reviewing other motivations underlying community groups, in this case, the RW/RT management and several other elements of the community, to be involved in the joint production of the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities, it is focused on values where people voluntarily express human values. and concern for others. As mentioned in Alford (2009), there are at least 3 (three) types of motivation in co-production, namely intrinsic, social, and normative motivation. Where the motivation in the community to express human values is included in the normative motivation.
While intrinsic motivation is more directed to increasing the psychological development of volunteers' self-esteem, as well as understanding where volunteering is an opportunity to increase knowledge and skills. This intrinsic motivation is also shared by the RW/RT management group and several other elements of society to be involved in joint production. While social motivation, which is more towards sociality, where volunteering is to help people to adjust and get along with other social groups is not too visible in the motivation of the RT/RW group as co-producers, because they are used to getting along and adjusting in their social environment. the group, not as newly assembled people.
In general, it can be seen that in the PTSP Keliling Kampung, the motivation of the RW/RT management and other community elements is voluntarily and, on their initiative, although it was initiated by an invitation from the PTSP. In addition, in these activities, they also do not get any payment or compensation, and they already have the motivation to participate in maximizing the effectiveness of services through these activities. Thus, the PTSP Keliling Kampung Warga / Ospo Lingga activity has fulfilled the second forming factor of co-production, namely the existence of community motivation as a voluntary public service provider. The motivation possessed by the community is in accordance with how important their role is in the activity. This motivation is also in accordance with what was stated by Verschuere, et.al (2014) that the motivation for co-production can be very diverse depending on the case at hand. Where in general the motivation that arises is a kind of concern to personal appreciation in the form of material or immaterial. On the other hand, an important motivation may be related to concern for the benefits to society, because most cases in coproduction raise the perception of co-producers by leading to social benefits. However, further Hattke & Kalucza (2019), through a post-hoc analysis revealed that the motivational findings of co-producers did not apply equally to all individuals. They state that these motivations are antecedent and situational factors that have different influences on the willingness of the co-producer type, where it is the type that determines strong beliefs about whether to participate in co-production or not. In general, intrinsic motivation has a much stronger influence on the co-producer's willingness. In contrast, the flexible type only considers situational characteristics and is not influenced by any prior motivation.

3) Citizen's participation creates private value and/or public value in the form of output or outcome
The concept of Co-production which is a form of cooperation between public service providers, namely the government and the community, must have an outcome. Outcomes are seen as personal and/or organizational changes, as well as the benefits that follow as a result or consequence of some activity or service. Outcomes themselves can relate to organizations and society in the form of short-, medium-or long-term results. Alford (2009) states that co-production must contribute to output and outcome, where output can come first, with co-production even without co-production on certain outputs. Output refers more to the results or products that are obtained directly with the implementation of the co-production activities, while outcomes are more directed to changes in individual or group behavior, as well as the impacts and benefits arising from these service activities in a broader perspective.
The output analysis is seen from whether there is a change in the percentage of rejected permit applications and accepting permit applications. Meanwhile, the outcome is also seen in the level of community satisfaction and the number of complaints submitted to the DPMPTSP Province of DKI Jakarta. In this activity, data analysis was also carried out on applications for delay permits and were rejected at 2 (two) service points which became case studies in this research, namely PTSP Grogol Petamburan District and PTSP Kebon Jeruk District, in presentation the application was rejected, and delayed licensing experienced a decrease when compared from 2018 to 2019 since the massive implementation of the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities.
Result from the data research about effectiveness of services through the activities of PTSP Keliling Kampung where one of the objectives of the activity is as direct assistance to the community, especially those related to online licensing which specifically aims to reduce the application of permits that are issued, rejected, or delayed due to an error in fulfilling the permit requirements or during the technical process of applying. The implementation of the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities, it has succeeded in increasing effectiveness in public services, seen from the decrease in rejected permit applications and delayed permit applications entering the PTSP Kebon Jeruk District PTSP, while for PTSP Grogol Petamburan does not exist because of the unavailability of data at the service point, but look at the rejected permit applications, it will also decrease in 2019. This can be seen to have an effect on increasing the efficiency of the public service system where the community also gets direct assistance and If there are missing files, they can be completed immediately.
Meanwhile, if we look at the outcomes obtained through the production of PTSP Keliling

Graph 1. Community Satisfaction Index in 2018 and 2019 (PTSP Keliling Kampung)
Source: DPMPSTP Community Satisfaction Survey Report DKI Jakarta Province (2018)(2019) Although the satisfaction index is not specifically implemented for PTSP Keliling Kampung, it is generally related to licensing services provided for these service points. However, these results can describe the outcome of the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities, which can contribute to increasing community satisfaction with the overall licensing arrangement. The activities of PTSP Keliling Kampung have resulted in outcomes including providing higher community satisfaction to the licensing organization, as well as reducing complaints from the community.
Thus, there is a change in attitudes and awareness in the community related to licensing, where the image of the licensing bureaucracy organized by PTSP has also changed to become closer and serve. With such outputs, it has also created better public value in society, as well as the creation of personal value, namely the benefits felt by the community/service recipients from an economic and environmental perspective.
In general, the community also stated that the results had a major impact on the overall output of public licensing services. The same thing was also expressed by the DPMPTSP where the results from co-production also have a big influence, because through the PTSP program this public space has a contribution to community satisfaction with licensing in DKI Jakarta, where all people can immediately take care of their permits without having to pay for the services of brokers again, because that is what has always been encouraged and has become the tagline of DPMPTSP that managing your permits is easy.
By looking at the parameters for the results and output indicators, all parameters include changes in attitudes/awareness within the community, benefits for the community both in terms of the economy and the environment, getting more effectiveness in public services, improving the efficiency of the public service system, getting better customer satisfaction, as well as reducing community complaints or complaints can be fulfilled in the PTSP Keliling Kampung program. This is also following what was expressed by Alford (2009), where co-production is a value creation activity. Furthermore, it is disclosed that if co-production is carried out with managerial (government) attention, then it must include public value creation, although in most cases it will also involve private value creation, which leads to more public value creation. In addition, if there is an expenditure of public resources for joint production, there need to be benefits for the public.
At the same time, the fact that co-producers are involved shows that some personal value is usually conveyed in the process as well, in which case it is what drives them to take part.

Typology of Co-Production Based on Community Involvement in the Service Cycle Phase
In an activity of co-production according to Nabatchi, et.al (2017), based on the service cycle where citizens participation is involved and what is produced in the process, Co-production is divided into four phases including Commissioning, Designing, Delivery, and Assessment. The author tries to trace the division of the four phases into the implementation of the PTSP Keliling Kampung as follows.

1) Commissioning
In the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities involving two parties, namely PTSP and RW administrators in the community as the main actors. The activity begins with identifying and strategically measuring priorities for public services, outcomes, and users needed in this activity, in the form of meetings between the parties involved to jointly formulate strategic services to the community directly in their environment. In the commissioning phase, it was stated that in carrying out the strategic planning of public services, results, and service targets, the PTSP did not only involve RW administrators as partners in activities but also included other parties such as sub-districts, kelurahan and local RTs as participating parties in activity planning. The output of this phase is the creation of a mutual agreement from the parties involved to form a service plan to the public in the form of picking up the ball directly to the neighborhood where residents live so as to facilitate public access to public services.

2) Designing
The designing phase is characterized by prospective (i.e., future-oriented) or concurrent (i.e., relating to what currently exists or is happening) (Nabatchi, et.al, 2017). In the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities, the main activity is to prepare a plan for the place of service in the community, then at this stage also determine how other agencies are involved or invited to carry out joint services, to form a pattern or process of joint service, The institutions are Bank DKI (business credit services), the DKI Jakarta Regional Tax and Retribution Agency (BPRD) (regional tax services) and the DKI Jakarta Population and Civil Registration Office (Population Services) as an additional service. In designing a community service place, conceptualized to be able to accommodate all components of public services so that they can be formed and implemented properly. In this Designing phase, the PTSP and the RW management jointly play a role in creating, planning, and making arrangements for public services that will be held in the community. The output of this phase is the creation of a service room for activities and instructions for implementing public service activities in the community.

3) Delivery
In the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities in the delivery phase, can be drawn as the phase that is most in line with the traditional view of co-production (Nabatchi, et.al 2017). In this phase, PTSP and RW administrators along with sub-district, urban, and RT plus other parties invited to be involved, such as BPRD DKI Jakarta, Dukcapil DKI Jakarta, and Bank DKI jointly carry out service activities to residents, the services provided are licensing services and/or residency service as additional services. This service is carried out to provide an easy access to the community to obtain public services in the environment where they live. It is known that the delivery phase is the backbone or the most related to the co-production itself, in this phase is the purpose of the Commissioning and Designing phase is to test its effectiveness. The output of this activity is the implementation of public service activities that are direct to the community.

4) Assessment
The assessment phase is a phase that focuses on monitoring and evaluating public services (Nabatchi, et.al, 2017). In the PTSP Keliling Kampung activities, all parties involved in providing services to residents are also involved together in the assessment phase, where after the activities are carried out, a kind of meeting is held to evaluate the activities and services provided to the community. It aims to find out the shortcomings and to improve the implementation of activities in the next implementation schedules. In addition, at the end of the PTSP Keliling Kampung Warga activity, the results of the evaluation and implementation of activities have an output in the form of a one-year implementation report contained in the DPMPTSP Annual Report.
Seeing citizens participation in the service cycle phase, including in the commissioning, designing, delivery, and assessment phases, in these activities citizens participation as coproducers has gone further to the assessment phase, although the assessment phase has not been carried out in a more organized and standardized manner. So that the activities of PTSP Keliling Kampung are in the Collective x Assessment typology. In this typology, the activity has achieved social benefits and the active role of the co-producer starting from the planning stage to the evaluation and assessment stage of the activity, namely licensing services. Of course, this is good enough to see the efforts made by PTSP and the community itself to provide even better licensing services to the community, especially concerning the transformation of online licensing services. With the main objective of implementing this licensing service method, it is intended to bring the presence of the government closer to the community or residents who need its services.
Thus, satisfaction with the implementation of licensing services in the DKI Jakarta Province increases, and the community is increasingly confident in submitting their permits independently.
The achievement of these goals will provide a better quality of life for the community and the surrounding environment.
The type of citizen's participation in the implementation of public service delivery, especially licensing, as in the PTSP Keliling Kampung/PTSP program is indeed still relatively new and has not seen sustainable benefits. In the concept of co-production, the community is expected to be able to take a direct role in providing services. Where so far in public services, especially in licensing at the DKI Jakarta Provincial DPMPTSP, the role of citizen's participation is more focused on complaints or evaluations of community satisfaction surveys which according to Cohen andUphoff (1977, in Voorberg, et.al, 2014) are a type of participation in evaluation. The implementation of the PTSP Public Space program by the DKI Jakarta DPMPTSP provides a new type of citizens participation which according to Cohen andUphoff (1977, p. in Voorberg, et.al, 2014) is participation in implementation which is citizen's participation in operational activities based on predetermined programs where the forms of participation can be in the form of energy, materials, money, direct participation or indirect participation, include the spirit of participation. So according to the author, even in the licensing sector, this type of participation in service implementation, namely using the co-production concept can also be implemented as long as it does not take authority in the licensing process which is absolutely in the hands of the government, such as signing or ratifying permits.
In general, the significance of this research is that the research results are expected to be useful for institutions, especially those engaged in public services. For the DKI Jakarta Provincial Government, especially the One-Stop Service and Investment Office, it is an input in the concept of public service delivery, especially through the implementation of Co-Production which increases the role of community participation. As well as academically, this research can provide theoretical contributions in enriching concepts related to the concept of developing public services, especially in the field of licensing and improving service quality in the context of developing science, and is expected to be used as a reference for further research that develops the concept of Co-Production in service delivery. other public. This is important so that research on this theme is growing in Indonesia and always provides new insights that are generated.

CONCLUSIONS
Citizen's participation as co-producer in activities PTSP Keliling Kampung has been seen where there is active participation from the community in the provision of services, the motivation of the community as a voluntary public service provider, and the creation of private and/or public value in the form of outputs or outcomes. PTSP Keliling Kampung activities are in the Collective x Assessment typology, in which the activity has achieved social benefits and the active role of the co-producer starting from the planning stage to the evaluation and assessment stage of the activity in licensing services. In general, looking at the results of the research, it can be suggested that PTSP and the community need to expand the active role of co-producers who can further improve the quality of licensing services themselves, as the example mentioned above shows that the community can play a more active role in direct licensing assistance to other communities on a communal scale. It also requires space for the community as co-producers to be fully involved starting from the initial initiation stage to evaluation. Although, of course it also still needs to pay attention to the limitations in the licensing service itself as the authority of the regional government.